2008-01-11 THALEKII - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

December 5, 2001 we broke ground at the Halekii intersection to work our way north into what is now a near-finished piece of the highway. At that time a five year clock was triggered. One of our conditions was that we needed to get this highway completed in five years or 60 months. Had that timeline held up, we would have been celebrating last month the one-year anniversary of a functional and completed highway. Having said that, we recognize and emphasize that the September 9, 2003 preliminary injunction that was placed on the project by the Third Circuit Court caused that clock to go into a state of suspense or what is formally called a state of tolling. At that point in time we consumed 22 months of that clock in getting the north half about 85 percent completed. There remains approximately 38 months on that five-year clock to complete the highway in total. It’s important to note that the clock is still in a tolling mode and has not restarted, separate and apart from the Third Circuit preliminary injunction which ultimately was resolved in a March 2006 settlement agreement and modified, an amended decision by the Third Circuit which took care of the Kelly plaintiff’s litigation. The Coupe case which currently prevents us from moving forward still places that clock in a state of suspense. I should also note that any reference I make to the Coupe family is only meant to provide some context to what we’re all having to work through. I’m not here to argue the merits or the complexities of the case. Please note that I respect the Coupe family’s right to take this decision up on appeal. The Third Circuit Court recently entered a judgment granting the County’s request to condemn the segment of right-of-way needed for the second phase of Mamalahoa Highway Bypass, keeping in mind that the Coupe family is our immediate neighbor to the south. We share a common boundary. The lead defendants in that action, the Coupes, have appealed the Third Circuit’s decision. The Third Circuit Court has also granted the County possession of the right-of-way pending the appeal. However, the Coupes have asked the Third Circuit to reconsider its possession order and a hearing has been set for January 29, 2008 to address that request. In answer to the question that came up earlier, Gary Yamagata during the course of the settlement agreement, as a concerned neighbor who was anxious to help find resolution through the litigation, stepped forward in the course of our mediation and asked us and presented us with an opportunity to explore what Yamagata Road might provide as an interim connector, knowing that the community and its wishes to get the full highway to be built, that that timeframe had been delayed. And Mr. Yamagata stepped forward with no previous engineering of the road. At the time we had a construction right-of-way which allowed trucks to go up and down that road prior to the opening of the Keauhou gate and the north half of the Bypass. At the time the settlement agreement was signed in March of 2006 we immediately embarked upon an examination with the engineers together with the County on what the possibilities might be on Yamagata Road. It was determined that, two things in particular: The slope was exceptionally steep; and at the time, and as we moved through this all of the concerns that you heard Mr. Sumada address surfaced. December of 2006 Mr. Yamagata formally withdrew from Oceanside’s consideration any further discussion using the right-of-way or using Yamagata Road as an option which prompted the County and our staff to look at the solutions that have been presented today. I also shared several people’s recognition that Jiro Sumada has worked diligently to find not only solutions for the Keauhou community and Halekii community but also operationally for what Oceanside needs to deal with given that we’re still a construction site and that intersection serves as an important staging area for the completion of the road. EXHIBIT A 24